Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 132 (CHH)

Archana v. Abhimanyu

2015-04-27

CHANDRA BHUSHAN BAJPAI

body2015
ORDER : Chandra Bhushan Bajpai, J. 1. By this order Transfer Petition (C) filed by the applicant seeking transfer of Civil Suit No. 23A/2014 (Abhimanyu Sahu v. Smt. Archana) pending before the Court of Additional District Judge (FTC), South Bastar, Dantewada, C.G. to the Judge, Family Court, Janjgir-Champa, C.G., is being disposed of. As per facts of the transfer petition, in brief, both petitioner and respondent are wife and husband. Their marriage was solemnized on 13-02-2011. After their marriage, the petitioner filed Civil Suit No. 161 A/12 for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act which is pending before the Court of Judge, Family Court, Janjgir-Champa, C.G. After filing of this civil suit, the respondent filed a civil suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce before the Additional District Judge (FTC), South Bastar, Dantewada, C.G. which is pending before the court concerned. It is submitted that the petitioner is residing at Akaltara from where the Family Court Janjgir-Champa is nearest place. After the petition filed by her under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to harass her, the respondent filed a divorce petition before the Judge concerned at South Bastar, Dantewada. Parents of the respondent are residing at Raigarh, so there is no difficulty for him for attending the Court at Janjgir-Champa. Also District Dantewada is a naxalite affected area and the petitioner is having fear to go there. The petitioner being a woman is having hardship to attend the Court at Dantewada as there is nobody to take her for hearing at Dantewada. It is prayed that the above mentioned civil suit pending before Dantewada Court be transferred to Judge, Family Court, Janjgir-Champa. 2. Even after service of notice in person, the respondent is not represented in the Court at the time of hearing either in person or through his counsel. 3. Heard the party present before the Court for this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner elaborately supported the contentions made above and submitted that looking to the grounds taken in the petition, the abovementioned civil suit be transferred from Dantewada to Janjgir-Champa. 3. Heard the party present before the Court for this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner elaborately supported the contentions made above and submitted that looking to the grounds taken in the petition, the abovementioned civil suit be transferred from Dantewada to Janjgir-Champa. He further submitted that as the civil suit filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed prior the above mentioned civil suit pending at Dantewada, it is clear that the suit filed by the respondent at Dantewada is filed to harass the petitioner. He also submitted that it is matrimonial matter, already Section 9 application of Hindu Marriage Act is pending at Janjgir-Champa, therefore, it would be appropriate that both the cases be heard and disposed of by the same Court to avoid contradictory findings. 5. As there is no representation on behalf of the respondent, nothing on record to contradict or any rebuttal for facts and documents filed by the petitioner. 6. To dispose of this transfer petition (civil), material available in the record are perused. 7. From the entire perusal of the material, on account of no rebuttal it is proved for the moment that both the parties are husband and wife, their marriage was solemnized on 13-02-2011 at Akaltara and the petitioner filed a civil suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights which is pending before the Judge, Family Court, Janjgir-Champa, C.G. After filing of abovementioned civil suit, the respondent filed a civil suit for a decree of divorce by dissolution of marriage against the petitioner before the Additional District Judge (FTC), South Bastar, Dantewada which is pending. The subsequent civil suit was filed much after the filing of earlier civil suit. Also both are connected matters, so in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate that both be disposed of by the same Court. The petitioner is a woman, Dantewada is very far away from Akaltara. She is having difficulty to attend the Court proceedings at Dantewada, it would be just that the abovementioned case be transferred from Dantewada to Janjgir-Champa. 8. The petitioner is a woman, Dantewada is very far away from Akaltara. She is having difficulty to attend the Court proceedings at Dantewada, it would be just that the abovementioned case be transferred from Dantewada to Janjgir-Champa. 8. On due consideration, the Transfer Petition (C) filed by the petitioner is hereby allowed and it is ordered that Civil Suit No. 23A/2014 (Abhimanyu Sahu v. Smt. Archana) filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act presently pending before the Additional District Judge (FTC), South Bastar, Dantewada, C.G. be withdrawn and transferred to the Judge, Family Court, Janjgir-Champa, C.G., for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. The trial Court/the Additional District Judge (FTC), South Bastar, Dantewada, C.G., is hereby directed to transmit immediately the concerned record towards the Judge, Family Court, Janjgir-Champa, C.G., for further proceedings. No order as to cost.